Author of "Tasty: The Art and Science of What We Eat," on the science of taste, culinary history, and the future of food. My work has appeared in Smithsonian magazine, Wired, The Washington Post, Mother Jones, the Guardian and the Huffington Post. In a previous life I was a reporter for The Times-Picayune of New Orleans, where I contributed to several Pulitzer Prize-winning efforts. I am the co-author of "Path of Destruction: The Devastation of New Orleans and the Coming Age of Superstorms."

Romney's Rising Oceans Joke

Just a quick note on one part of Mitt Romney’s big speech. He didn’t simply dismiss global warming, or reject policies intended to address or mitigate against sea level rise, which is closely tied to global warming. Politicians do those things all the time. It’s ill-informed and irresponsible. But Romney took this a step further: he used the very idea of controlling sea level rise as a mere rhetorical device, a laugh line to mock Barack Obama‘s grandiosity. And he milked it for a few long seconds as the crowd at the Republican National Convention laughed.

“President Obama promised to slow the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family.”

I don’t buy that this is solely about Obama’s alleged hubris. It’s a twofer: of course the crowd was laughing at the hubris angle; while I don’t have a poll to prove it, it’s safe to say most RNC attendees are not too keen on the current consensus on climate science either. So: double rimshot. But this remark is, needless to say, unhelpful. Sea level rise is a genuine problem. The oceans are actually rising as the planet warms up, in part because the volume of water is expanding due to the extra heat, and in part due to the ongoing melting of polar ice. Evidence suggests that for most of the past 3,000 years, sea levels were stable, but that they began rising in the 1950s. Since then, they crept up at an annual rate of 1.7 millimeters per year. Lately, though, sea level rise has apparently been accelerating: This 2010 paper published by Science magazine (paywalled), notes that over the past 20 years, global sea level has risen an average of 3.3 millimeters a year.

This is becoming a severe social and political problem because so many people around the world, and millions of them in the United States (including Romney’s Boston headquarters) are located along coastlines. Approximately 10% of the world’s population lives at elevations of 10 meters or less above sea level, the Science paper notes, and many of these places suffer from subsidence, erosion, and other problems that hasten their exposure and possible demise.

The biggest risk here is from storms, which can suddenly pump up sea levels by many meters, with little warning. People like living near coastlines, and, in the U.S. and other parts of the developed world, coastal development has surged in recent years. But most assumptions for development and flood protection assume a certain stability that no longer exists. Denying this (as some state and local governments are doing) is crazy: sooner or later, the people living in these places, and the businesses they built there, will pay the price.

So Romney’s notion that helping families and protecting communities against sea level rise are somehow diametrically opposed is silly. He knows better.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Speaking of Religion… It’s obvious that you just ascribe to what they tell you, because apparently Thought and Science aren’t even a blip on your Radar. (You know, that technology that allows you to see where objects can be.)

Phony – that describes pundits and fakers of the right who deny Climate Change just to cater to their mostly ignorant constituents simply for the sake of being elected. (If not ignorant, then manipulative to back their own narrow self interests, because it has an effect on their business or stock portfolio.)

Saying that global warming is the reason for the melt down of economies is just nonsensical, next thing you’ll tell us the sky is falling. (Of course, you will just deny that, because obviously you’re just looking for grant money to actually make facts that support your hypothesis. Ooops, sorry didn’t mean to incorporate an aspect of science there. )

Speaking of the money grab that you suggest all scientists seem to be involved with, how about any number of issues where large Corporations, supported by various lobbies and politicians, erode the well-being of all Americans? I’m sure no benefits are given for supporting unhealthy food in school lunch programs.

where is your Ph.D. from? Since you call experts in climate change “pseudo scientists” what are you? Obviously completely ignorant of science. Do you also believe raped women can’t get pregnant? Now the GOP must be experts in science to you aren’t they? Wake up and smell the coffee, it is BIG BUSINESS (oil and coal) who don’t want you to believe in science and are trying their hardest (with unlimited $ in contribution to the GOP) to make sure you stay as ignorant as you can. Obviously for some (like you) it has worked.

It’s basic physics. CO2 absorbs inferred light. This is indisputable. It’s been demonstrated a thousand times over. We use this basic principle in everything from fire-alarms to heat-seeking missiles. This extra energy causes the gas (in this case the atmosphere) to retain more heat energy. This too is indisputable. You can do the experiments at home if you want. If it were not true, we would be living on a giant ice ball. 02 and N2 don’t retain heat well. We burn tremendous amounts of carbon-based fuels. The by-product of this is CO2. This gas goes into the atmosphere. As CO2 increases, it is nearly impossible for long term temperatures to stay steady.

It’s absurd to doubt global warming when in fact you can go out and put a stick in the sand and measure the rise in sea level. The recent trend in the Republican party to adopt this attitude is one of the biggest complaints I have about them. Science and technology are the KEY drivers to economic growth.

Now you can argue about causes of global warming, that’s where skepticism is more justifiable.

And you can be even more skeptical that we can do anything about it. Developing economies are not about to cut back on their growth while the developed economies aren’t.

So we are running a very interesting experiment with this planet. Hopefully our descendants won’t curse us for the results.

If your purported “global warming religion” is the cause of Spain’s terrible economy, how do you explain Germany’s big expansion? They’re both members of the EU and thus, equally part of the EU’s climate targets.

Andrew – It’s a basic scientific fact that global temperatures have risen and fallen, sometimes in extreme swings, innumerable times in the planets history. What caused those shifts in global temperature? Are we currently experiencing one of those shifts right now? If man was not around to emit CO2 what was the catalyst?

These are some of the questions that I think most AGW skeptics would like science to address before we upend our economy and make drastic and possibly unnecessary changes to our way of life. Some of the changes put forward by the IPCC and others could potentially have deadly consequences in some developing nations.

I don’t doubt that global temperatures are changing. They have done so constantly since the formation of the planet. Isn’t it possible that we just happen to be a species that’s around during a normal temperature change that has the intelligence to notice and measure it? Could it be simple arrogance to think that we as a species can have any impact on the colossal forces that affect our planet in this immeasurable universe?

Denial … NO-ONE with a scientific background will deny that climate change exists. The problem is with WHO/WHAT it is ascribed too. The evidence clearly shows it is the caloric output of the SUN, and that man made contributions are not relevant (e.g. water vapour is the main greenhouse gas) The dumb mindless sheep that fall prey to false science believe everything that is spewed at them from leftist nut-case climatologists, who care nothing for the truth, but rather want a panicked mankind to fall into anarchy, and eventually revert to subsistence living (about 200 million people max) and the rest of humanity can just literally drop dead/kill themselves etc.

It’s wonderful that young people these days realize that they no longer need those stuffy institutions that spend millions of grant dollars (from TAXpayers, no less!) on teaching that boring sciency stuff. Why, almost ANYone these days can have an opinion on something that those stupid old people spent 20-30 years studying, with long tongue-twisting names. It’s refreshing that you have chosen to be in the vanguard of New Science, my dear. Perhaps you could tell us what we should do about the worldwide deaths of coral reefs. I understand it might have some repercussions on our consumption of fish and seafood. The Sciency types insist this is due to global warming, but I’m sure you have much preferable answers.